CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 30Lower Extremity Biomechanics and PathologiesKnee injuries and reconstruction techniquesSports Dynamics and Biomechanics

Effects of barbell back squat stance width on sagittal and frontal hip and knee kinetics

Open access
Lahti, Johan, Hegyi, András, Vigotsky, Andrew D., Ahtiainen, Juha P.·2019·Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
DOI 10.1111/sms.13305
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Different stance widths are commonly utilized when completing the barbell back squat during athletic general preparedness training. Width manipulation is thought to influence sagittal plane stimuli to the hip and knee extensors, the primary extensor musculature in the squat. However, how width manipulation affects frontal plane stimuli is less understood. Knowledge of hip and knee net joint moments (NJM) could improve exercise selection when aiming to improve sport-specific performance and prevent injuries. Fourteen adult amateur rugby athletes were recruited for this study. After a familiarization period, participants performed wide- (WIDE, 1.5× greater trochanter width) and narrow-stance (NARROW, 1× greater trochanter width) barbell back squats to femur parallel depth, using relative loads of 70% and 85% of one-repetition maximum. Sagittal and frontal plane hip and knee kinetics and kinematics were compared between widths. A Bonferroni-corrected alpha of 0.01 was employed as the threshold for statistical significance. Knee flexion angle was statistically greater in NARROW than WIDE (P < 0.0001, d = 2.56-2.86); no statistical differences were observed for hip flexion angle between conditions (P = 0.049-0.109, d = 0.33-0.38). Hip-to-knee extension NJM ratios and knee adduction NJMs were statistically greater in WIDE than NARROW (P < 0.007, d = 0.51-1.41). At femur parallel, stance width manipulation in the barbell back squat may provide substantial differences in biomechanical stimulus in both the sagittal plane and the frontal plane. In certain contexts, these differences may have clinically relevant longitudinal implications, from both a performance and a injury prevention standpoint, which are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/sms.13305

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Compared to trunk inclination, inclination of the tibia during squatting has an opposite influence on the knee flexion moment.

    “Compared to trunk inclination, inclination of the tibia during squatting has an opposite influence on the knee flexion moment.9,10,16–18”

    From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [17]

  • Moving the tibia from a more upright position to a more forward position shifts the knee joint center further away from the resultant ground reaction force vector, thereby increasing the knee flexion moment during squatting.

    “Moving the tibia from a more upright position (Figure 3A) to more forward position (Figure 3B) shifts the knee joint center further away from the resultant ground reaction force vector, thereby increasing the knee flexion moment.”

    From A Biomechanical Review of the Squat Exercise: Implications for Clinical Practice. (2024) · cites this paper as [17]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Lahti, J., Hegyi, A., Vigotsky, A. D., & Ahtiainen, J. P.
Affiliations
  • University of Jyväskylä (FI)
  • Northwestern University (US)
Corresponding author
Ahtiainen, Juha P.
ORCID
Venue
Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2018-10-11
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
44-54
ISSN
  • 0905-7188 (ISSN-L)
  • 1600-0838
DOI
10.1111/sms.13305
OpenAlex
W2890024138
Cited by
30
References
33
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1
FWCI
1.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Scandinavian Journal of Medicine and Science in Sports (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Jyväskylä University Digital Archive (University of Jyväskylä) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Lower Extremity Biomechanics and Pathologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Knee injuries and reconstruction techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Sports Dynamics and Biomechanics
Keywords
back squat, stance width, hip joint moments, knee joint moments, knee adduction moment, knee flexion angle, hip flexion angle, rugby players, injury prevention
MeSH terms
Adult, Biomechanical Phenomena, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Hip, Humans, Knee, Male, Posture, Range of Motion, Articular, Weight-Bearing, Muscle, Skeletal, Young Adult, Athletes

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review